人类与人工智能互动中的公众信任与责任归因:空中交通管制与车辆驾驶的比较

IF 3.8 Q2 TRANSPORTATION
Peidong Mei , Richard Cannon , Jim Everett , Peng Liu , Edmond Awad
{"title":"人类与人工智能互动中的公众信任与责任归因:空中交通管制与车辆驾驶的比较","authors":"Peidong Mei ,&nbsp;Richard Cannon ,&nbsp;Jim Everett ,&nbsp;Peng Liu ,&nbsp;Edmond Awad","doi":"10.1016/j.trip.2025.101545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Artificial Intelligence (AI) has potential to address the increasing demand for capacity in Air Traffic Control (ATC). However, its integration poses several challenges and requires deep understanding of public perception. Insights from the context of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs), in which more studies have been done, can inform such understanding. In this article, we investigate how the public perceives the automated future of ATC in close comparison to AVs. We conducted two studies to examine public trust and blame attribution toward human and AI operators in different Human-AI Interaction (HAI) models, covering three levels of automation (<em>Level 0: AI tool, Level 3: AI trainee, and Level 5: AI manager</em>). We also explored their perceptions of ATC and vehicle driving (VD) by using ten task-related measures (<em>Familiarity, Expertise, Tech Awareness, Openness, Media Discourse, Stake, two measures of Uncertainty, Positive Safety, and Negative Safety</em>) and five agent-related characteristics (<em>Capability, Robustness, Predictability, Honesty and Cooperativeness</em>). The results showed greater trust and less blame attributed to humans in both ATC and VD, except in the Level 3 AI trainee model where humans were blamed more than AI. We also found both similarities and differences in people’s perceptions of the two contexts. Our findings provide evidence-based insights into how the public attribute trust and blame to the operators in ATC and VD. These results will inform industries on the development and implementation of AI integration in aviation and advise policymakers in evaluating public opinion on AI regulation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36621,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","volume":"32 ","pages":"Article 101545"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public trust and blame attribution in human-AI interactions: a comparison between air traffic control and vehicle driving\",\"authors\":\"Peidong Mei ,&nbsp;Richard Cannon ,&nbsp;Jim Everett ,&nbsp;Peng Liu ,&nbsp;Edmond Awad\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.trip.2025.101545\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Artificial Intelligence (AI) has potential to address the increasing demand for capacity in Air Traffic Control (ATC). However, its integration poses several challenges and requires deep understanding of public perception. Insights from the context of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs), in which more studies have been done, can inform such understanding. In this article, we investigate how the public perceives the automated future of ATC in close comparison to AVs. We conducted two studies to examine public trust and blame attribution toward human and AI operators in different Human-AI Interaction (HAI) models, covering three levels of automation (<em>Level 0: AI tool, Level 3: AI trainee, and Level 5: AI manager</em>). We also explored their perceptions of ATC and vehicle driving (VD) by using ten task-related measures (<em>Familiarity, Expertise, Tech Awareness, Openness, Media Discourse, Stake, two measures of Uncertainty, Positive Safety, and Negative Safety</em>) and five agent-related characteristics (<em>Capability, Robustness, Predictability, Honesty and Cooperativeness</em>). The results showed greater trust and less blame attributed to humans in both ATC and VD, except in the Level 3 AI trainee model where humans were blamed more than AI. We also found both similarities and differences in people’s perceptions of the two contexts. Our findings provide evidence-based insights into how the public attribute trust and blame to the operators in ATC and VD. These results will inform industries on the development and implementation of AI integration in aviation and advise policymakers in evaluating public opinion on AI regulation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36621,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives\",\"volume\":\"32 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101545\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198225002246\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"TRANSPORTATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198225002246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人工智能(AI)有潜力解决对空中交通管制(ATC)能力日益增长的需求。然而,它的整合带来了一些挑战,需要深刻理解公众的看法。在自动驾驶汽车(AVs)的背景下,已经完成了更多的研究,可以为这种理解提供信息。在本文中,我们将调查公众如何看待ATC的自动化未来,并与自动驾驶汽车进行比较。我们进行了两项研究,以检查在不同的人类-人工智能交互(HAI)模型中公众对人类和人工智能操作员的信任和指责归因,涵盖三个级别的自动化(0级:人工智能工具,3级:人工智能培训生,5级:人工智能经理)。我们还通过使用十个任务相关的测量(熟悉度、专业知识、技术意识、开放性、媒体话语、利害关系、两个不确定性测量、积极安全和消极安全)和五个与代理相关的特征(能力、稳健性、可预测性、诚实性和合作性)来探索他们对ATC和车辆驾驶(VD)的看法。结果显示,在ATC和VD中,对人类的信任更高,对人类的指责更少,除了在3级人工智能练习生模型中,人类受到的指责比人工智能更多。我们还发现,人们对这两种情景的看法既有相似之处,也有不同之处。我们的研究结果为公众如何将信任和指责归咎于ATC和VD的运营商提供了基于证据的见解。这些结果将为航空业发展和实施人工智能集成提供信息,并为决策者提供评估人工智能监管公众舆论的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Public trust and blame attribution in human-AI interactions: a comparison between air traffic control and vehicle driving
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has potential to address the increasing demand for capacity in Air Traffic Control (ATC). However, its integration poses several challenges and requires deep understanding of public perception. Insights from the context of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs), in which more studies have been done, can inform such understanding. In this article, we investigate how the public perceives the automated future of ATC in close comparison to AVs. We conducted two studies to examine public trust and blame attribution toward human and AI operators in different Human-AI Interaction (HAI) models, covering three levels of automation (Level 0: AI tool, Level 3: AI trainee, and Level 5: AI manager). We also explored their perceptions of ATC and vehicle driving (VD) by using ten task-related measures (Familiarity, Expertise, Tech Awareness, Openness, Media Discourse, Stake, two measures of Uncertainty, Positive Safety, and Negative Safety) and five agent-related characteristics (Capability, Robustness, Predictability, Honesty and Cooperativeness). The results showed greater trust and less blame attributed to humans in both ATC and VD, except in the Level 3 AI trainee model where humans were blamed more than AI. We also found both similarities and differences in people’s perceptions of the two contexts. Our findings provide evidence-based insights into how the public attribute trust and blame to the operators in ATC and VD. These results will inform industries on the development and implementation of AI integration in aviation and advise policymakers in evaluating public opinion on AI regulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Engineering-Automotive Engineering
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
185
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信